ACIT, CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI vs. VNG PACKAGING PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7699/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 September 2022AY 2010-114 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the Pr. CIT's order under Section 263 was quashed, the consequential assessment made by the AO would not survive. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal became infructuous.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order allowing relief to the assessee on an addition made under Section 68. The original order under Section 263, which led to the assessment, was quashed by the ITAT and upheld by the High Court and Supreme Court.

What were the issues?

Whether a consequential assessment order survives when the order under Section 263, which initiated the reassessment, is quashed by a higher appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH “H” NEW DELHI ]

Before: SHRI G. S. PANNUSHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Ahuja, Shri Vivek Verma
Hearing: 19/09/2022

आदेश / O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, J. M. :

1.

This appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24 [hereinafter referred to as 1 CIT (Appeals)] New Delhi, dated 18.07.2019 for the assessment year 2010-11.

2.

The Revenue In its appeal has raised the following substantive ground of appeal:-

“ On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee and allowing relief of Rs.12,10,13,000/- (addition made under section 68 of the Act by the Assessing Officer) without appreciating the detailed findings given by the AO in assessment order.”

3.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that this appeal of the Revenue arises out of the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) read with section 263 while giving effect to the order passed by the ld. Pr. CIT under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The ld. Counsel submits that the order passed by the ld. Pr. CIT under section 263 of the Act was quashed by the ITAT, by order dated 8.04.2019 in which was also affirmed by the High Court and the SLP filed by the Revenue was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the orders are placed in the paper book at pages 1 to 32. The ld. Counsel, therefore, submits that since the ITAT quashed the order passed by the ld. PCIT under section 263, the consequential assessment made by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act will not survive and consequently, the appeal of the Revenue became infructuous.

4.

The ld. DR fairly submits that the Tribunal vide order dated 26.07.2019 in quashed the order passed by the Pr. CIT under section 263 of the Act, therefore, in view of the order of the Tribunal the present appeal of the Revenue which arises out of consequential assessment made pursuant to the order of the ld. Pr. CIT became infructuous.

5.

On hearing both the parties and perusing the orders placed on record we notice that the Tribunal vide order dated 26.07.2019 in had quashed the order passed by the ld. Pr. CIT under section 263 of the Act. The order of the Tribunal was also affirmed by the Hon’ble High Court in ITA. No. 693/Del/2019 dated 26.07.2019. Further the SLP No. 12966 of 2020 filed by the Revenue against the decision of the Hon’ble High Court was also dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 4.08.2020. In the circumstances the present appeal of the Revenue which arises from the consequential assessment made under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act will not survive. Thus the same is liable to be dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous.

Order pronounced in the open court on : 19/09/2022.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →